Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29864114›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

DNA immunization site determines the level of gene expression and the magnitude, but not the type of the induced immune response.

Stefan Petkov, Elizaveta Starodubova, Anastasia Latanova, Athina Kilpeläinen, Oleg Latyshev, Simons Svirskis, Britta Wahren, Francesca Chiodi, Ilya Gordeychuk, Maria Isaguliants

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Emergence of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein at the vaccination site.Immunity, inflammation and disease · 2023
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Stefan PetkovKarolinska Institutet, Department of Microbiology, Tumor and Cell Biology, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-8052-9646
Elizaveta StarodubovaEngelhardt Institute of Molecular Biology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia.
Anastasia LatanovaKarolinska Institutet, Department of Microbiology, Tumor and Cell Biology, Stockholm, Sweden.
Athina KilpeläinenKarolinska Institutet, Department of Microbiology, Tumor and Cell Biology, Stockholm, Sweden.
Oleg LatyshevChumakov Federal Scientific Center for Research and Development of Immune-and- Biological Products of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia.
Simons SvirskisRiga Stradins University, Riga, Latvia.
Britta WahrenKarolinska Institutet, Department of Microbiology, Tumor and Cell Biology, Stockholm, Sweden.
Francesca ChiodiKarolinska Institutet, Department of Microbiology, Tumor and Cell Biology, Stockholm, Sweden.
Ilya GordeychukChumakov Federal Scientific Center for Research and Development of Immune-and- Biological Products of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia.
Maria IsaguliantsKarolinska Institutet, Department of Microbiology, Tumor and Cell Biology, Stockholm, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Optimization of DNA vaccine delivery improves the potency of the immune response and is crucial to clinical success. Here, we inquired how such optimization impacts the magnitude of the response, its specificity and type. BALB/c mice were DNA-immunized with two model immunogens, HIV-1 protease and reverse transcriptase by intramuscular or intradermal injections with electroporation. DNA immunogens were co-delivered with DNA encoding luciferase. Delivery and expression were monitored by in vivo bioluminescence imaging (BLI). The endpoint immune responses were assessed by IFN-γ/IL-2 FluoroSpot, multiparametric flow cytometry and antibody ELISA. Expression and immunogenicity were compared in relation to the delivery route. Regardless of the route, protease generated mainly IFN-γ, and reverse transcriptase, IL-2 and antibody response. BLI of mice immunized with protease- or reverse transcriptase/reporter plasmid mixtures, demonstrated significant loss of luminescence over time. The rate of decline of luminescence strongly correlated with the magnitude of immunogen-specific response, and depended on the immunogenicity profile and the immunization route. In vitro and in vivo BLI-based assays demonstrated that intradermal delivery strongly improved the immunogenicity of protease, and to a lesser extent, of reverse transcriptase. Immune response polarization and epitope hierarchy were not affected. Thus, by changing delivery/immunogen expression sites, it is possible to modulate the magnitude, but not the type or fine specificity of the induced immune response.

Indexed as

ImmunizationAnimalsAntibodies, ViralCytokinesEpitopesFemaleGene ExpressionHIV ProteaseIntracellular SpaceMiceMice, Inbred BALB CMusclesSkinVaccines, DNAAntibodies, ViralCytokinesEpitopesHIV Proteasep16 protease, Human immunodeficiency virus 1Vaccines, DNA

Identifiers

PMID29864114
PMCPMC5986124

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.